Alternative Water Allocation in Kyrgyzstan: Lessons from the Lower Colorado River Basin and New South Wales

 

---

Water 2010, 2
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 

520
4. Validation Approach 
The model was validated based on water distribution data in the Akbura River basin in 2006. The 
model was run with a fixed monthly volume of water in the Papan Reservoir to fulfill the gaps in 
accounting of the actual water use by irrigation water users. The model was then run for 2007 and 
predicted values of monthly water storages in the Papan Reservoir were compared with actual data 
(Figure 4). A high degree of convergence between observed and predicted values was achieved
for 2007. 
Figure 4. 
Comparison of predicted and actual values of water storage in the Papan 
Reservoir, 2007.
 
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Ja
F
Mr Ap My
Je
Jl
Ag
S
O
N
D
Months
T
h
e 
res
e
rv
oi
r s
tora
g
e
, M
m
3
Actual
Predicted
The following section provides an overview of the lessons that could be learned from the 
experience of the Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA) and the water organization practices of 
New South Wales, Australia. This is followed by the findings of the focus group discussions on the 
issues and adaptable alternatives to improve current water allocation practices in the Akbura River 
basin from the water users’ point of view. The final section presents the results of the
modeling exercise.
5. Case Study of the Lower Colorado River Basin 
Water resources management in the Lower Colorado River basin is characterized by increasing 
demands and competition for renewable but limited water supplies. This specific challenge does not 
differ from that in Kyrgyzstan. The policy and regulatory arrangements in the basin that are thought to 
be of interest for the Kyrgyz case are as follows: 
1 
LCRA’s four-fold mission: water, hydropower, conservation and land. This multipurpose 
mission is the basis for LCRA’s more than 70-year long viability. In contrast, in Kyrgyzstan, in 
the Akbura River basin context, the local water management organization is only responsible 
for the delivery of water with no jurisdiction over the production of power. And, water 
marketing does not contradict the water law of Kyrgyzstan.

---

Water 2010, 2
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 

521
2 
LCRA supplies water along two general categories of water demands: firm and interruptible. 
Firm water demands presently include the water for municipal, domestic, industrial, power 
generation, irrigation and in-stream flow maintenance purposes. Interruptible stored water is 
always used for agricultural irrigation. In the case of Kyrgyzstan, municipal and domestic 
water supply has a higher priority than irrigation.
3 
Water supply to irrigation districts by LCRA is interruptible as water is supplied against 
contract and is subject to curtailment during shortages. It is distinguished from firm water 
supplies which should remain constant even during repeated critical droughts. In the case of 
Kyrgyzstan, irrigation demand of upstream and downstream water users is subject to 
curtailment at equal percentages based on the water supply level.
4 
Lower reach irrigation water users in the Lower Colorado River basin have rights to 
consumptive water uses according to the natural regime of river runoff (run-of-river rights). 
Similar agreements exist between the upstream and downstream countries in the Akbura
River basins.
Double-level tariffs are applied in the Lower Colorado River basin, with the first level applied to 
water delivered according to the natural run-of-river flow and the second level to the stored water. We 
hypothesized that the possible impact of the adoption of the double-level tariffs in Kyrgyzstan could be 
as follows: users’ share in the water organization’s budget will increase; water organizations will have 
incentives to improve water accounting; and WUAs will be encouraged indirectly to promote water 
saving. However, this intervention may not affect on-farm water use efficiency directly since currently 
farmers pay water charges on an area basis.